deletions | additions       diff --git a/section_Future_Potential_In_the__.tex b/section_Future_Potential_In_the__.tex  index aa7f1f9..46dbbfb 100644  --- a/section_Future_Potential_In_the__.tex  +++ b/section_Future_Potential_In_the__.tex 
...
\section{Future Potential}  In the literature knowledge graphs are not (usually) distinguished from ``bare statement'' graphs, in that they do not encode or publish the epistemology \footnote{em{Epistemology} \footnote{\em{Epistemology}  defines why something is known} of knowledge asserted in the graph. We see this as troubling because it does not \em{privilege} knowledge: in most existing knowledge graphs supported and unsupported assertions are given equal weight.  Moving forward, there is an opportunity to leverage existing vocabularies, including the Provenance Ontology (PROV-O) \cite{Moreau_2015}, and the Nanopublications Framework \cite{groth2010anatomy}, to improve the clarity and utility of knowledge graphs.  A nanopublication is a set of RDF graphs: an \em{assertion graph} (the knowledge), a \em{provenance graph} (the justification), and an \em{attribution graph} (the believer).